Talk about taking something out of context.
Apple can't patent "multitouch" since they didn't invent the concept.
They have patents on some of their implementations of it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Wins Broad Patent on iPhone Multi-Touch User Interface
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple can't patent "multitouch" since they didn't invent the concept.
They have patents on some of their implementations of it.
For a professional assessment always visit PatentlyApple.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...imacs-edge-to-edge-glass-cover-front-row.html
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...imacs-edge-to-edge-glass-cover-front-row.html
If multi-touch with two fingers or more is now protected, this is going to put a serious damper on my making out techniques.
Swirl instead of scroll. Gotta change it up.
I'm sorry, but no, this is gibberish:
It doesn't matter what is "incorportated" [sic] into the specification of the patent. In determining whether or not the competition infringes, you look at the claims of the patent. And the claims are quite specific. Someday Apple may get a divisional application granted that claims some of the other things discussed, but that day isn't today. And this "incorportating" [sic] idea is silly anyway - in order to be given protection for the things discussed in those other incorporated patents, those patents must be GRANTED. And, even then, those patents would only grant protection for whatever is claimed in the claims of those patents.
I can describe ALL SORTS of things in the text of a patent - but I don't get any exclusive right to them (that is, I have no legal right to exclude others from practicing them) unless the patent claims include those things. And the patent claims here only claim the idea discussed in this thread - the idea of using two fingers to move around inside a frame of a web page while using one finger to move the webpage around. (technically n and m fingers)
Last edited:
So, company X invents something. Company Y steals that idea without blinking. You stand up and applaud?
By your post then I should understand that anyone who thinks that stealing Apple's IP is wrong is then a fanboy. Nice...
I don't care about the "competitors", I care about the outrageous constant copying without putting a minimal effort to create something good. If they get permission to use the IP or pay for it, fine by me, otherwise, you're just defending pirates and killing the inventors.
This is not "the iPhone" patent, this is just one amongst several others. IMHO, I hope Apple gets credit for the innovation it brought to the market, and those who want to use it should as well pay for it.
This is how the patent works
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxGpoc5HRYc&feature=player_embedded
Watch the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxGpoc5HRYc&feature=player_embedded
Watch the video
Someone who actually understands patents:
http://thisismynext.com/2011/06/22/apple-granted-patent-webpage-scrolling-behaviors-media-crazy/
http://thisismynext.com/2011/06/22/apple-granted-patent-webpage-scrolling-behaviors-media-crazy/
Apple filed for this in 2007. You know, when no one thought anything would come of the iPhone and that it was alright to just ignore it.
The patent was finally granted now.
This is just a lot of the usual prescience by Apple.
An excellent explanation by Nilay Patel. I actually enjoyed it!
Last edited:
omg, so many fans getting arroused by this patent as if its theirs. They were granted a patent, so what? Others will have to pay, so what? How many innovations does Apple take from others? This is what all companies do. They take from each other, and pay licence fees. Why does everytime some company files a patent, 16 year old fanboys have to come out and bash others? Apple will not sue, they will collect fees on all future multitouch devices.
The fact that so few people understand patents, is just proof to me (and many it appears) of how broken the patent system is.
One of the main points of the patent system was to protect an inventors idea from being copied, or used by others without permission. Inventors are rarely Lawyers, but here in 2011, they are almost expected to be.
I have a great idea, but I need to search over 8 million patents, and 3 - 4 million applications to verify that I am not using someone else's idea.
I am not saying the system needs to go away, perhaps needs a more modern replacement, with a much better indexing system that a tech savvy garage inventor could search / refrence.
One of the main points of the patent system was to protect an inventors idea from being copied, or used by others without permission. Inventors are rarely Lawyers, but here in 2011, they are almost expected to be.
I have a great idea, but I need to search over 8 million patents, and 3 - 4 million applications to verify that I am not using someone else's idea.
I am not saying the system needs to go away, perhaps needs a more modern replacement, with a much better indexing system that a tech savvy garage inventor could search / refrence.
Ars is covering the debate by linking to both sides of the coin here:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...row-apple-multitouch-patent-sparks-debate.ars
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...row-apple-multitouch-patent-sparks-debate.ars
Looks like the people who actually understand how to read a patent are finally stepping forward to point out you need to read the claims, not the abstract, to figure out what the patent covers
Looks like the people who actually understand how to read a patent are finally stepping forward to point out you need to read the claims, not the abstract, to figure out what the patent covers
Actually I understood from only the abstract once I read your and kdarling's comments.
I don't see how this follows at all. If I can't use your invention I am forced to innovate more instead of following your lead.
Apple iPhone Interface awarded full patent
http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobile-technology/apple-awarded-patent-iphone-interface-042
http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobile-technology/apple-awarded-patent-iphone-interface-042
I don't think this patent will stand as is..it's way too broad. Apple didn't invent multitouch and to award them a patent on multitouch on a mobile device is VERY broad, such to the extent that even if new technology is developed that utilizes more than one finger at a time, it would infringe on their patent. I'm sure this one will be tied up in court for a while. I don't think anyone (besides Apple shareholders) should consider this good news, as if the patent does stand, it has great potential to stifle the progression of mobile technology (yet another reason I don't think it will stand).
"You need a portable multifunction device with one or more processors, memory, and a touch screen display. Check!
That device needs to display a portion of a web page in a stationary application window, and that portion has to include both the regular page content and a frame displaying a portion of frame content. Thats something like a Google Maps embed its a frame within a webpage that displays other content.
The device has to detect a translation gesture by a single finger, and in response somehow translate both the main content and the frame content. That means when you scroll with a single finger, everything has to move.
Lastly, the device has to be able to detect a translation gesture by two fingers and in response translate only the frame content without translating the main content. Thats exactly what happens on the iPhone today you can pinch-to-zoom on a map embed without zooming a main web page.
Now, thats a pretty narrow patent, and I dont think the big brains at Google or Microsoft (or Motorola or Samsung or HTC or whoever) will have a hard time engineering around it its really just one specific type of multitouch interaction. I certainly wouldnt call it an iPhone patent or anything nearly so broad or sensational. That said, its certainly yet another arrow in Apples quiver of patents on the things that make the iPhone work the way it does, and Cupertino may well assert it against another OEM sometime down the line. But even still, Apples already locked in litigation against HTC, Samsung, and Motorola one more granted patent isnt going to swing the balance by much. So lets all take a breath and remember to read the claims carefully next time, shall we? Its better for everyone."
- thisismynext.com
People need to seriously open up their minds and read a little more on other news. Only reading "macrumors.com" will not get you really far. Reading different things give you many different perspectives.
I'm Sorry I sound like a d-bag, but all this "IPHONE PATENT ALL SMARTPHONE COMPANIES WILL DIE" is wearing me out.
That device needs to display a portion of a web page in a stationary application window, and that portion has to include both the regular page content and a frame displaying a portion of frame content. Thats something like a Google Maps embed its a frame within a webpage that displays other content.
The device has to detect a translation gesture by a single finger, and in response somehow translate both the main content and the frame content. That means when you scroll with a single finger, everything has to move.
Lastly, the device has to be able to detect a translation gesture by two fingers and in response translate only the frame content without translating the main content. Thats exactly what happens on the iPhone today you can pinch-to-zoom on a map embed without zooming a main web page.
Now, thats a pretty narrow patent, and I dont think the big brains at Google or Microsoft (or Motorola or Samsung or HTC or whoever) will have a hard time engineering around it its really just one specific type of multitouch interaction. I certainly wouldnt call it an iPhone patent or anything nearly so broad or sensational. That said, its certainly yet another arrow in Apples quiver of patents on the things that make the iPhone work the way it does, and Cupertino may well assert it against another OEM sometime down the line. But even still, Apples already locked in litigation against HTC, Samsung, and Motorola one more granted patent isnt going to swing the balance by much. So lets all take a breath and remember to read the claims carefully next time, shall we? Its better for everyone."
- thisismynext.com
People need to seriously open up their minds and read a little more on other news. Only reading "macrumors.com" will not get you really far. Reading different things give you many different perspectives.
I'm Sorry I sound like a d-bag, but all this "IPHONE PATENT ALL SMARTPHONE COMPANIES WILL DIE" is wearing me out.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
The idea behind his comment is that patents by nature are a legal way of monopolizing.
Those companies who use Apple's technology will now be paying Apple and Apple will be gaining a sustainable advantage. Those companies who decide to innovate will be forced to go back to the drawing board and use more of their resources in R&D. Some will be successful at innovating while others won't. Those who are successful would still have to play the catch up game with Apple.
Personally, I say good for Apple. They were the first ones to devote their resources to get that technology in their products. Meanwhile, the copycats have had 3 years of selling products which have leached off of Apple's tech.
moderately said:
The idea behind his comment is that patents by nature are a legal way of monopolizing.
Those companies who use Apple's technology will now be paying Apple and Apple will be gaining a sustainable advantage. Those companies who decide to innovate will be forced to go back to the drawing board and use more of their resources in R&D. Some will be successful at innovating while others won't. Those who are successful would still have to play the catch up game with Apple.
Personally, I say good for Apple. They were the first ones to devote their resources to get that technology in their products. Meanwhile, the copycats have had 3 years of selling products which have leached off of Apple's tech.
refreshing
This is what this is all about. The application is saying that the ui most commonly used at the time of this filing was not really user friendly. It sucked, and everyone was trying to make a keyboard with more buttons to do more things. They are changing the game! They are innovating! They are saying the status quo sucks, and needs to be changed. They filed their first patent application for multipoint touch screen in 2004. Give some credit where credit is due. Without Apple innovation, the "smartphone" as we know it today would be very different. Quote;
As portable electronic devices become more compact, and the number of functions performed by a given device increase, it has become a significant challenge to design a user interface that allows users to easily interact with a multifunction device. This challenge is particular significant for handheld portable devices, which have much smaller screens than desktop or laptop computers. This situation is unfortunate because the user interface is the gateway through which users receive not only content but also responses to user actions or behaviors, including user attempts to access a device's features, tools, and functions. Some portable communication devices (e.g., mobile telephones, sometimes called mobile phones, cell phones, cellular telephones, and the like) have resorted to adding more pushbuttons, increasing the density of push buttons, overloading the functions of pushbuttons, or using complex menu systems to allow a user to access, store and manipulate data. These conventional user interfaces often result in complicated key sequences and menu hierarchies that must be memorized by the user.
More;
Patent application filed in 2004 by Apple for capacitive touchscreen is granted
Posted: 17 Feb 2010,
This is what this is all about. The application is saying that the ui most commonly used at the time of this filing was not really user friendly. It sucked, and everyone was trying to make a keyboard with more buttons to do more things. They are changing the game! They are innovating! They are saying the status quo sucks, and needs to be changed. They filed their first patent application for multipoint touch screen in 2004. Give some credit where credit is due. Without Apple innovation, the "smartphone" as we know it today would be very different. Quote;
As portable electronic devices become more compact, and the number of functions performed by a given device increase, it has become a significant challenge to design a user interface that allows users to easily interact with a multifunction device. This challenge is particular significant for handheld portable devices, which have much smaller screens than desktop or laptop computers. This situation is unfortunate because the user interface is the gateway through which users receive not only content but also responses to user actions or behaviors, including user attempts to access a device's features, tools, and functions. Some portable communication devices (e.g., mobile telephones, sometimes called mobile phones, cell phones, cellular telephones, and the like) have resorted to adding more pushbuttons, increasing the density of push buttons, overloading the functions of pushbuttons, or using complex menu systems to allow a user to access, store and manipulate data. These conventional user interfaces often result in complicated key sequences and menu hierarchies that must be memorized by the user.
More;
Patent application filed in 2004 by Apple for capacitive touchscreen is granted
Posted: 17 Feb 2010,
Last edited:
hasn't pinch to zoom and other multitouch gestures been already patented when the first iPhone came out?
I thought that's what SJ meant when he said, "and boy have we patented it."
I also thought that's why Samsung (I dunno about the other companies, but I have lots of friends working for SS and LG, so I can refer to them) was looking for ways around the pinch to zoom for a LOOONG time.
When I mentioned the iPhone to a SS friend, and then later showed him the iPod Touch (because that's what got to Korea first) he said, "Those patents won't be exclusive for long, companies always share patents."
I said, "probably not." I was right, SS couldn't use pinch to zoom.
Soon, they had seminars and they invited people from all over the world to show them an effective "pinch to zoom" type gesture that would not infringe on Apple's patent.
They ended up with double tapping for a while, but finally made their accelerometer work to zoom and now they have a "move up and down with thumbs on screen to zoom" feature (maybe it was for the digital zoom on the camera)
Given all the stuff that happened, I was under the impression that lots of multi touch gestures were already patented by Apple.
So... on topic, this new patent, if it's only for double finger scrolling inside a web page, then not much of a problem for anyone.
I thought that's what SJ meant when he said, "and boy have we patented it."
I also thought that's why Samsung (I dunno about the other companies, but I have lots of friends working for SS and LG, so I can refer to them) was looking for ways around the pinch to zoom for a LOOONG time.
When I mentioned the iPhone to a SS friend, and then later showed him the iPod Touch (because that's what got to Korea first) he said, "Those patents won't be exclusive for long, companies always share patents."
I said, "probably not." I was right, SS couldn't use pinch to zoom.
Soon, they had seminars and they invited people from all over the world to show them an effective "pinch to zoom" type gesture that would not infringe on Apple's patent.
They ended up with double tapping for a while, but finally made their accelerometer work to zoom and now they have a "move up and down with thumbs on screen to zoom" feature (maybe it was for the digital zoom on the camera)
Given all the stuff that happened, I was under the impression that lots of multi touch gestures were already patented by Apple.
So... on topic, this new patent, if it's only for double finger scrolling inside a web page, then not much of a problem for anyone.
I believe the purpose of this collection of patents not only covers each individual patent, respectively, as cited by their own patents, but several of these patents are uniquely and jointly implemented within Apple's embedded devices they target and now Apple could be developing a product implementing all of these patents into one or several upcoming products and have been granted a unique patent that combines them all in a specific implementation.
Obviously, each one of these cover different devices in theory:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20110023287.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20110078624.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7800592.pdf
etc.
I'm not sure entirely sure I understand your point, but keep a couple things in mind. First, the stuff he lists in that article are not patents. Similarly, two of the three URLs you list above are not patents. They are patent applications. Huge difference.
Second, each patent stands on its own - I infringe the claims of one or more patents. The fact that one patent refers to others doesn't change the scope of that patent.
In this case, the patent that was granted yesterday covers something very narrow (the m and n finger swipe of a web view with a frame). That's it. That guy's argument that somehow the patent is very broad because it refers to other patents is nonsense. This patent does not "cover" the combination of all the other patents. It covers only what is claimed. The only way Apple can sue anyone for infringing is if they do the two finger swipe thing referred to in the claims.
Thank you. Those references are simply to other applications, at least one of which has been rejected once already.
Nice blog, but it used the wrong example with the zoom. Again, the patent is ONLY about scrolling in an embedded frame, not about zooming or 3D rotation or anything else. As the patent claims several times:
"...translating the frame content in the stationary application window, to display a new portion of frame content... "
In graphics speak, translating to display a new portion = XY scrolling.
It's not that broad, but it's certainly an obvious solution on a multitouch screen. You can just imagine one developer talking to another: "Hey, Billy Bob, scrolling with one finger always moves the whole page around. But I sometimes want to move around just a section inside of it. So I need a different scrolling gesture that's not too different from the one-finger method. By the way, I'm on a screen that can recognize the movement of more than one finger. Any ideas?"
D'oh!
Nope, Apple has no patent on pinch to zoom. Pinch dates back to at least the early 1990s. They weren't even the first to publicly talk about doing it on a phone.
I do not agree with LTD on much but Apple filed for this patent in 2007. It just took this long to work threw the system but basically it is retro active back to 2007 and it counts as years off the patents life as it already been "active" for that long.
Also people who are much more knowledge in this field have pointed out that it is not a very broad patent and might not even stand up if Apple tried to sue someone for it as because it would be an obvious solution to the problem. Add in the fact that I would not be surprised in the least that there is some prior art out to it as well. Surface has been a project that started research at MS in 2001. God knows how many patents and things are in all that research that could easily kill this patent by Apple if they tried to use it in court against someone.